The five-ringed circus

Do you find it odd that every four years, we sit in front of the television and watch someone be declared the world’s best at… javelin-throwing? I can understand the allure of the sport before, say, the invention of guns. Had television existed a millennium ago, it’s not hard to imagine Native American tribes setting up barbecues outside their wigwams or ordering in bison-toppinged pizza, and raising a foamy mug of fermented corn to the athlete whose spear travelled the farthest. Such a talent was useful then. You couldn’t get those bison toppings if you didn’t know how to spear a bison. Javelin-throwing was more than just a sport. It was a job interview. But now? The current men’s record stands at 323 feet. There’s no city in the world you could hurl a javelin that far. You’d poke a neighbour in the eye and end up with a lawsuit.

What I find most fascinating about the Olympics is that they celebrate the ability of man and woman to demonstrate talents that are no longer relevant. In the work-obsessed present day, “Faster… Higher… Stronger” simply denotes the ability to reach the office on time despite hitting the snooze button twice, or the ability to climb the corporate ladder and snag that promotion (and the corner cabin). Even in the realm of sport, “I can swim faster than you” somehow sounds more purposeful than “I can run up to a mark and set down this pole and vault over.” The prospect of being chased by shark is more plausible than that of needing to leap over buildings. Unless you’re James Bond. Or a burglar being chased by cops. And you have the presence of mind to always carry a pole.

I hope I’m not sounding (entirely) facetious. And I’m not being dismissive. I’m just amazed that, every four years, we gather to celebrate these feats that must have meant so much more in earlier millennia. And we forget about them soon after. We go back to applauding Kohli and wondering if Rafa will make it at least to the quarter-finals. I feel a bit guilty about this, because everyone has an off day, and a tennis player who does badly in a tournament gets many more opportunities that same year to be better. But if you have an off day at the Olympics, as Abhinav Bindra did, you can do nothing about it for the next four years. Bindra, of course, has opted to retire, but there are others who’ll be four years older, whose bodies will be four years older, who’d have spent countless hours training, away from the spotlight, and who’ll get just that one shot. No one will say, “Man, that was some amazing dedication you displayed for four years, sweating it out, watching what you eat, focusing relentlessly on getting a medal for a country that barely acknowledges, let alone reward, your sport.” They’ll just say, “Tcha, missed by a millimetre.”

With some events, it’s not so much about relevance as beauty – and nowhere is this more evident than in the synchronised diving competition. It’s hard enough trying to land arms first. But to mock gravity thus, with a partner mirroring your moves in mid-air – that’s not sport, that’s magic. Or take Dipa Karmakar, who has brought to our attention the Produnova vault, which, apparently, isn’t a place of safekeeping for valuables from Tsarist Russia. For the longest time, Russians and Eastern Europeans were the only ones who could do those marvellous things with their bodies. That a young girl from Tripura is pulling this off is mind-boggling – not because she’s from Tripura, but because she’s from India, where bodily contortions of this kind are usually reserved for item numbers on screen. In these events, the question we ask isn’t “How far?” or “How high?” but simply “How?” It’s the same question we ask as we ponder the lack of wardrobe malfunctions during beach volleyball.

Then we have weight lifting, consisting of four precise moves. Bend. Grunt. Hoist. Drop. Again, a talent from a more gladiatorial era, though I’m fairly sure Rahul Gandhi wishes he could exercise these moves on his Twitter trolls. That’s what I’m saying, that we could find new uses for these old feats of strength and endurance. We could make them relevant again. Except, probably, golf. In a fortnight during which the world’s fittest and finest are running, swimming, diving, shooting arrows and rifles, and throwing heavy spherical objects (the IOC calls it “shot put,” though the BCCI would classify it as “chucking”), it does seem hard to care about people sauntering about on grass in a sport that, on television, is about as action-packed as fishing. But I suppose even that is better than sitting at home, shooting snarky barbs at the Olympics. I propose we label it a sport and give it a name: Snarchery.

Wow. If you had to shoot snarky barbs I wish you’d target the latest Sony / Zee / Whatever Film Awards or even the IPL, both of which are just TRP-hog dramas. The Olympics at least can be called the elitest of the elite. And relevance? Excuse me? What’s the relevance of cricket to the average city-dweller or office-goer? Seriously, this wasn’t funny, if that’s what you were going for. Disappointed in you.

Hah, that was funny writing. But here we are, all sitting on couches and commenting on a blog of a man whose job is to watch a bunch of oldish men cavorting with youngish women, singing songs, toting guns, indulge in some improbable drama … hmm, i guess that is more relevant to our daily lives than is exulting over men and women demonstrating mastery over their bodies

Then what’s the point of doing anything BR…?? I’m shocked that you’re seeking ‘relevance’ in what’s IMO the greatest sporting spectacle the world has to offer… And no BR, ‘we don’t forget these feats soon after’… I still remember all of Phelps’ 8 golds in Beijing; particularly the 100m butterfly, where he beat Serbia’s Milorad Cavic by 0.01 seconds… I still remember Federer celebrating like never before when he won the Olympic gold in doubles… I still remember Bolt setting the current standing world records in 100m & 200m… I still remember Yelena Isinbayeva setting the world record in pole vault at the same Olympics, and countless other memories from various other Olympics that’ll live with me forever… Just because India seems to be rubbish at most of the sports doesn’t mean we question the ‘relevance’ of the Olympics… Agree with Babli… I found this article seriously unfunny and unsavory…

Hilarious article. The reasons you’ve outlined are exactly why I couldn’t care less about watching the Olympics. I would definitely feel proud and put a post on Facebook if someone from the Indian contingent wins a medal, but I wouldn’t sit and watch it. Cricket, Football and Tennis are at least fun to watch and you get to see some of these events being played out at least once a year if not more.

Another thing I absolutely hate during Olympics season is the media’s reporting around these events. What the heck are they implying by saying “Sania makes do with bronze” or “Abhinav Bindra settles for silver”? Did they have some kind of settlement wherein one guy says “This time I get gold, you take silver, next time you will get gold?”. Isn’t the fact that they won a medal out of the hundreds who tried to get a spot in the Olympics more than enough?

“In the work-obsessed present day, “Faster… Higher… Stronger” simply denotes the ability to reach the office on time despite hitting the snooze button twice” – Sure, but in that case, why make films for that matter? I won’t comment about music since Bhai has already affirmed that you don’t need singers…ahem. But basically why do anything at all that doesn’t enrich some million/billion dollar fatso sitting in Manhattan, City of London, BKC etc and as applicable?

I must also add here that as a general practice, if you are speaking with reference to your personal experience, it’s better to stick to I rather than the grand We. No, we don’t all focus only on Kohli, certainly not me as a disillusioned ex-cricket fan. I did catch what I could of the World Championships in 2013 in Moscow for instance. I remember that Isinbayeva bounced back from a somewhat lacklustre (by her standards) showing at the London Olympics. I don’t remember if the 2015 Championships were even broadcast in India. Sadly, the sports channels are so keen to focus their resources on only three sports – cricket, football and F-1 – that they prefer to show repeat telecasts of some old and boring Sharjah encounter rather than live feeds of many ‘lesser’ sports.

Long story short, no, Bindra gets chances to redeem himself even if he doesn’t win a medal at the Olympics. He won Gold at the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, for instance. Yes, they have fewer opportunities to showcase their talent on a grand international stage, compared to cricketers or tennis players but that also means a less punishing match schedule (hours which they no doubt dedicate to honing their skills, since the margins in athletic events, or shooting or archery for that matter, are slim compared to cricket or tennis).

Comparing brangan to Shobha De? Come on, that’s really not fair. This was not a politically correct article probably, hence drawing all your ire, but it was definitely funny. The article didn’t come across as dismissive to me but as an alternate, minority opinion piece.

I only compared snarkiness of both celebrities. I enjoy her writing sometimes. I was not angry but surprised when I read this from BR. Why and how you come to conclusions about me, Varshaganesh? My motives and my mood?

I have a question out of genuine curiosity, with no sarcasm or criticism.. Something I have been thinking for a while.. Every time during the Olympics season, discussions start about how our government does not provide enough resources and facilities for the various sports to flourish and how our athletes are left to practice in sub world-class facilities and so on. My question is why should the government spend on development of a few world-class athletes as opposed to developing a lot of smaller facilities that reaches a larger population base? What is our fascination with few individuals winning in global events? I am not just talking in terms of the Olympics sports, but any other sport where the government is expected to spend a ton of money on the development of a few players so that we feel the pride when they win. This does not contribute to the economic development of our society and there is no forseeable benefit of this in the future as well (as opposed to our space programmes for example). To sum up, why should a country spend enormous amounts of money on a few sportspeople instead of bringing facilities that reaches more people encouraging a healthier lifestyle. National pride is the only answer I can think of and it doesn’t make a strong enough argument for me. Any other thoughts?

Enna koduka sir pera: Well, by that logic, why — say — send satellites into space? Why not use that money to… I don’t know, improve roads, provide drinking water in Rajasthan, etc. A country needs to progress simultaneously in various spheres — some will produce tangible effects, some intangible ones.

Build rec facilities for a few, and many will benefit. (I don’t think anyone is suggesting special facilities only to train special people.) A future champion will emerge from these facilities. What “use” is a champion? I guess the same “use” as Rahman winning an Oscar. It’s strictly a personal achievement, but it does a lot to one’s feeling of a nation.

The way I see it: this article does not at all deride the Olympics and its various sports through seeking relevance (which I suspect must have been the understanding). It, on the other hand, praises the participants who would go through so much for essentially nothing in return. And sneers at us, the audience, for.. well, for not doing much more than Snarchery. 🙂

BR – I mention in my previous comment that there are forseeable benefits in the future for our space programme. Whereas, I don’t see one for sports.

I think you need special facilities to train special people to win medals in the Olympics and that’s one of the reasons why India usually under performs in the Olympics. And, because building good infrastructure costs a lost, it would eventually mean only the highly skilled are let in to train there. So, I disagree that building few rec facilities will benefit many.

My question is exactly about government putting in efforts in making a few champions. I see it as mostly a personal achievement and am just not sure to what extent this national pride is relevant in making a strong argument for it.

I think I didn’t convey my thoughts clearly in the earlier comments 🙂 I will try to be more precise here.

My question is not why the government should spend on sports (or arts to take as an analogous example). I strongly believe sports and arts are as much important to the society as roads/schools/hospitals. The question comes when I look at what percentage of population it reaches. In the case of arts, (hypothetically) should the government focus its resources on a few artists like A.R. Rahman that they can win the Oscar/Grammy/any other prestigious award or should it setup smaller, but more art centers across many towns to encourage local people to engage in arts. Drawing the same analogy for sports, should the government focus on a handful of players so that they can win the most prestigious tournament in their sport or set up smaller, but more sports facilities across many towns for people to come and play.

In essence, I do not get the fuss about countries winning medals, it’s a personal achievement – yes, but do I see it as a national achievement? – no.

Also, I remember you writing about government funding for the arts, not too long ago. I had meant to ask “fund with whose money”, but forgot. I’m struggling to see how “the arts” are not banal, but sports are.

@ BR/Enna koduka sir pera: IMO the Olympics or for that matter any such sporting or art events are over rated. Sports/Art are more of a want basis for the society not a need basis… I am not saying Govt shouldn’t invest on these but it should not be the highest priority. Obviously space exploration has many uses for the mankind and will help us grow as a nation. Being good in cricket or music or movie making may get us some personal glory and that’s about it.. In a nation filled with problems ranging from corruption, caste issues, misogyny and so forth am suprised we have more articles showing anger/attention towards the skill or lack of skills of the athletes. Don’t you think we show our anger for the wrong things in our society? How many people even raised voice about Piyush and his sufferings in the jail, farmer suicides, Dalits being abused in Gujarat/throughout the country… Even our anger at the lack of medals at the Olympics lasts only till Virat scores a centrury… So when as a nation if we have the spare resources to focus on sports and arts we can and we should but as of now there are lot of more important issues to take care of…

Sanjana – Hey, I am not concluding anything about you. I understood that you meant the snarkiness comparison and I was surprised that someone had found the snarkiness quotient of both of them comparable. And the rest wasn`t directed at you, but were just my thoughts about the collective comments.

Sports is after all a relic of a martial era. Once upon a time it made sense to have such physical contests to make exercise and training more fun and competitive for soldiers during peacetime.

But now, its more of an old habit taken too seriously. I admit that whatever sport or activity it may be, excelling at the highest level against tough competition is a personal challenge that can be very fulfilling. But for the spectators its just comic entertainment and nothing more: watching fully grown men in kutty jetties running around a ball. I mean, play is for toddlers, right? How can you take it seriously when you see grown-ass men doing it as a full-time job! Okay, so you can whack a ball with a piece of wood really well, what about that?

At least if its simply a display of brute physical prowess, then it could serve as an entertaining freakshow. But sports now have so many rules, with new ones being invented all the time. All to level the playing field and not let freak physical abnormalities become an advantage. So its becoming less of a demonstration of primal physical skills and more of working your way through a bureaucratic system of contorted constraints.

All this is of course relevant only at the highest level. At a more amateur level, sports is a total waste of time. If it is physical activity thats needed, one might as well learn some useful skills that not only exercise one’s body but could also be of use in emergency situations, if not in everyday life. Like climbing, parkour, MMA. They can be fun too.

But this whole “I can jump/throw/kick more than you”-type contests are as pathetic as “my penis is longer than yours”.

P.S. Yeah, I was the fat nerd in school who was picked last in any team sport, usually to serve as a goalkeeper or substitute fielder. So that may explain the bias in my opinions on this.

Because BRangan said this, “I hope I’m not sounding (entirely) facetious.”. Well, it might have worked better if he was because as a ‘serious’ article it doesn’t get very far. Especially the argument that nobody needs something like javelin throwing. Well, nobody really needs cricket either, nor cinema. Nobody needs anything other than Pokémon Go, apparently. Amazing this intersection of free market snark and Marxist utilitarianism. Maybe it does make sense at some level since both systems fundamentally exist to serve a select elite whilst offering false promises to the rest.

@ Enna koduka sir pera: I get your point. I don’t really like the nuclear arms race aspect of the Olympics. That is not what it was meant to be. Then again, tennis was also meant to be a game of strokemaking, not incredible fitness and athleticism gained and maintained through a training regimen that is out of the reach of mere mortals, however breathtaking the modern game may be to behold. So from India’s perspective, I would absolutely also prioritise providing access to sports facilities for all rather than burning money on a select few who MIGHT win an Olympic medal. Let those countries who have money to spare (or don’t but still care more about Olympic medals than poverty) train their athletes for the Olympics but I don’t think India needs to be in that race. If India gets a medal, it’s a bonus.

Sports like Basket ball and Foot ball closely simulate pack animal behavior. They have to co-ordinate and pass the ball around and determine which side the ball should be pushed to to get the desirable result. Cricket, baseball etc. are not that similar to actual animal hunts but certain pack behavior is evident there too.

Games like kho-kho are most obvious. The prey is allowed to go in a zig-zag way, the pack is not allowed to, the pack depends on wearing the stamina of the prey down. They also take one prey at a time as pack animals usually do.

The evolutionary need for javelin throw has already been discussed. By why do they persist? Because they can. Why weight lifting was useful to the cave-people is evident too, they did not have cranes and wrecking balls. Why do they persist? Because they can. Domestic cats hunt small prey in spite of already having a steady source of food. The pleasures honed by natural selection will die hard. The satisfaction they provide us is visceral.

What is the evolutionary need to write poems or sing songs or act in movies or review them or comment in blogs? WE are the freaks of nature. All of us.

P.S. Pokemon Go satisfies an evolutionary need too. Apart from being hunters, we were gatherers.

P.P.S BR wrote this for the heck of it. That is obvious. I wrote this comment for the heck of it too. I hope that too is obvious.

P.P.P.S I hated Physical Education classes as much as Kadakumar says he did. More on that later.

Loved the article. Just hoped it hadn’t given away the satire in the last line.

About the relevance of Olympics or sports in general, isn’t this a very bias-driven debate? I mean I know that every debate at some level is, but this is just as broad as it gets. If I were someone with a significant interest in sports, I would obviously ‘want’ the government and people to spend a lot of money and time on it, rather than on Indian cinema embracing Tarkovsky’s language or censorship issues with Pahlaj mama, which might be the ‘wants’ of a cinema lover. These ‘wants’ will become my ‘needs’ if I were a struggling runner or a budding filmmaker. An unemployed engineer will need more focus on programs like ‘Start-up India’ or ‘Make in India’ and a young research assistant will want huge release of funds in Cryotechnology and stuff. These wants and needs ultimately serve the self, which is a good thing because that’s how it IS supposed to be. So this exercise of pointing fingers and taking sides is totally futile, IMO.

W.R.T what India as a nation wants/needs, If there is a petition for an idealistic all-round development, I would definitely sign and support it, but then I will leave the task of prioritizing specific needs/wants, to those qualified people (I hope) who are employed by us to make these decisions. With respect to MY wants, I would want more relevance being given to the choices one has to make at a young age. ‘Choice’ is practically absent in a lot of Indian schools and homes, and I have a problem when MY needs and wants are decided by someone else. Expose me to everything and make me responsible for my own decisions, irrespective of whether I succeed or fail.

I believe that my intentions in writing this piece — any piece, actually — are none of your business, and the reader should (and will) read the piece the way his or her internal circuitry dictates. That whole authorial intent thing we’ve discussed a thousand times here. So I expected some comments along the lines of “you’re such a moron… get off your lazy ass and do something first before lampooning the Olympics” all the way through “you are my genius rock-star, this is comic gold, may I please have your children!”

But this response I did not expect. I mean, I seriously didn’t:

“In the midst of all the hullabaloo going around relating to the performances of Indian players at the Rio Olympics, it was heartening to see a hard-hitting article from Mr.Baradwaj Rangan of The Hindu, that talks about the effort and hard work that goes in to the making of an Olympian.”

“At a more amateur level, sports is a total waste of time. If it is physical activity thats needed, one might as well learn some useful skills” – Actually, if you have any experience of regularly playing amateur sports, you would be aware that it revitalises the body that is being laid to waste in sedentary jobs (for most people who have a college education and are employed in the service industry), energises you to face the day and boosts your productivity at work too. So it is immensely useful. It may not appear useful to you and that’s fine but don’t generalise your experience to apply for everyone because it doesn’t. Believe me, in school, I was the fat-ass who was NEVER needed in any sports teams and was always first from last in running races. Today I am an intermediate tennis player and could probably if not definitely outrun some of the guys who used to beat me by miles in running races back then. So it can be done but it requires recognising that one’s rationalisations as to sports being a waste of time are just that – rationalisations to make one feel good about one’s own laziness and nothing more. Speaking of which, did I mention that a huge benefit of being a healthy, fit sportsperson is avoiding shelling out money for medical consultations, tests and freaking antibiotics.

“But this whole “I can jump/throw/kick more than you”-type contests are as pathetic as “my penis is longer than yours”. ” – Again, in my experience, amateur sports are played in a very positive and cheerful spirit unlike the dog-eat-dog world of pro sport and the few cheats are usually the ones who don’t last very long in the game. Because they just don’t get it; they are obsessed with winning or losing even in amateur games and can’t learn to enjoy every moment they play which is what the rest of us do.

Last night I stayed awake till past 11 PM just to watch 400M Freestyle relay in swimming for the Canadian women’s team that had two swimmer’s both 16 years old. And the US team made of Ledecky. Canada was hoping to win a medal after 20 years in this category and US were counting on Ledecky winning the Gold medal.

One of the Canadian Penny Oleksiak, just 16 years also swam as an anchor and secured bronze medal for Canada. What makes you want to root for this swimmer is that she only learned to swim at the age of nine and has become an Olympic winner in such a short span of time. It makes you think of life skills such as determination, passion, endurance and commitment to be good at what ever sport an athlete trains in. This year’s Olympics has been mired by doping scandal but all that is forgotten when you see may young athlete shine at the Olympics.

Madan “Speaking of which, did I mention that a huge benefit of being a healthy, fit sportsperson is avoiding shelling out money for medical consultations, tests and freaking antibiotics.” So true. Just think of WHO declaring “Obesity” as global epidemic.

BR: Relevence? Actually, the relevance of sports in its original meaning in today’s world is nothing.

But it is still relevant. Why? You may ask. In the olden days, Germans asserted their superiority by waging wars. Same as the US, the Japan, China, Russia did to assert theirs.

The revival of Olympics by Pierre de Coubortin might have been to do with extending the ancient olympics which you know was relevant in those days. Those skils were then required.

But now with all those peace treaties around, UNO around policing and not allowing anyone to invade anyone. How then do those above aforementioned countries assert their supermacy over the rest of the world?

Sports of course. Olympics is a spectacle of countries vying for being the most superior race.

You can see the countries that have had big ambitions and waged wars, were agressive are the ones who end up being in the Top 5.

Sports is civilized war. Casualty is in watching how others fare so poorly.

Those countries at the top crave and yearn to assert their supremacy and hence succeed.

India on the other hand was never too ambitious, never bothered to assert the supremacy of the Indian race.

We see it just as some sport and we lose in front of those who treat it like war. The latter is always going to end up winning overall because intentions and motives are starkly different.

So the relevancy lies not in treating sport as sport but as war wherein one can assert their supremacy over another, which has been the driving force for well developed countries.

How then could the exclusion of cricket, which US, China, Japan, Russia can’t play, be explained. Same is the case with football which made its appearance intermittently.

Is there any game in the Olympics that humiliates these four big fishes? Nope. They can’t allow themselves to be humiliated, being under some other power.

If Cricket were included India and Australia would have made merry, all other cricketing nations included. But then they would come up embarrassingly on top of the four big fishes.

Same is with football. South American and European countries would have ruled the roast which would undeniably hurt the big four because they can’t make their mark in there.

And when they do include, it is less enticing so that the main players aren’t attracted to it which gives them a fighting chance.

If you ask me, Olympics is a propaganda running just to make the world known that who were superior are still superior notwithstanding the method of proving the same.

“Just think of WHO declaring “Obesity” as global epidemic.” – Absolutely. But I was going beyond obesity there. Sure, curing obesity may make you look you better what with all the weight you’ve shed but additionally playing sports, esp outdoor sports, really builds up the body’s resistance to diseases so you don’t even fall sick as much as you used to. In our overcrowded and polluted cities, this is a very real problem which lot of office goers experience so if only they would devote an hour in the morning to a sport, they could free themselves of this misery. I know how difficult it is to allocate an hour in the morning…and also how easy it is to maintain it once you start playing and enjoy the sport. Then, getting up at 5:30 no longer feels like a chore. I don’t promise that you will avoid any and every illness just by playing a sport, but you will notice after keeping it up for a sustained period of time, say a year or so, that you are fitter than many of your age-group colleagues in office.

Amit Joki: Though I agree with your argument, I think there are two things where I differ

1) Cricket is not part of Olympics because ICC is being a lazy ass in taking cricket to Olympics. Also, there is hardly any commercial benefit, so BCCI, CA and ECB don’t give a flying full toss about Olympics. Absence of cricket in Olympics has got more to do with cricket world’s disregard for Olympics than any propaganda of superior race theory ( I don’t discount your theory, just saying it’s not applicable for cricket)

2) In spite of it’s many faults Olympics is full of touching human stories. There is a Refugee team of 10 athletes. One of them – Yusra Mardini was saving refugees from sinking last year and is competing in swimming. Athletes from South Sudan have been living in a refugee camp for last 10 years and are competing in long distance running. To me, the human will to fight against odds is the story of Olympics

I can just see Brannigan having great fun writing this article, leaning back into his plantation armchair with the rosewood arms, waiting for the outraged gasps he knew would ensue. Mean trick, old boy, mean trick, not cricket at all.

To a large extent, the aura of the Olympics has been tarnished – it’s no longer athletes at their peak level of fitness; it is steroids (state-sanctioned or not) in quest of a medal. (And if anyone believes that because the US athletes have not been found guilty, they must not be taking any steroids to improve their performance, I’ve a bridge to sell you!)

Also, there’s no longer any fun when the difference between gold and silver is x/hundredths of a second.

That said. I think there is something to be said about men and women whose bodies are at peak physical perfection, who work hard to maintain it, to play a sport they obviously love and are good at, especially these days when it seems that a sedentary lifestyle is something to boast about, and obesity is a modern disease. Perhaps these sporting events will inspire some children, at least, to play a sport? And why should we not take pride in representing our country?

Like many other things, sport can also only flourish when the government (or corporates) step in. It needs funding. Yes, there are more important things, like providing food and clothing and employment to our teeming billions, but then that is an argument that can be used against government funding of anything other than food, clothing and employment.

I would like to see more grassroots development, however. But funding our athletes to attend the Olympics is not mutually exclusive to that end. (Sending more bureaucrats than athletes, however, is a different ball game altogether.)

India is a country where sports itself is given least priority even in schools where the P.T classes are hijacked by the other subject teachers. Brangan. I have read stories of people where taking up sports has helped them to a greater quality of life. For sure people who come from the down trodden society don’t care about the relevance of the sport. They just want to survive and be well and sports give you that.

Struggling to understand the questions about how funding elite athletes is somehow going to stop sports funding at grassroots level, and how time playing sports can be better utilised saving the world or some such thingie. Why do these things have to be mutually exclusive may I ask? If you dig a bit deeper into the trails and tribulations faced by some of our Olympic athletes, you might see things differently. Posting some excerpts from this video of Dipa Karmakar

“The gym where I started initially did not have proper equipment. It didn’t even have a vaulting table, so we would put mats on top of each other and make do with that. The gym would flood in the monsoon season. There would be rats and cockroaches around. So it was a struggle to start with. “

Once her talent was noticed, the gym got upgraded – benefitting the WHOLE community.

“After I got the 2014 bronze medal, my life changed. People have made me a celebrity.”

Sounds like her sport has won her admiration and respect from lots of people – something which only TV, politics, Bollywood and cricket provides easy access to.

“At my age, Indian parents are worried about marrying their daughters off, but its not like that in my family. They have always supported me. My husband wouldn’t be controlling because I don’t like restrictions.”

So it sounds like her sport has helped her develop much-needed independence and confidence to have control over her own life. What was that question about sport funding vs funding to overcome misogyny again?

“Since I have become a celebrity in Tripura I feel that I have to give more to my people. They have given me so much love. I feel the need to pay them back. “

Don’t think her sport has made her arrogant, do you?

And she did all this, by WILLINGLY putting in many many hours of training every SINGLE day, knowingly picking a risky routine which has also won her international admiration and getting herself immune to all the beaurocratic red tape and apathy of the Indian government (how else would you explain all the scrambling to send her physio to Rio only after she won the qualifying round?). That she has put herself on the same platform as gravity-defying superstars like Simone Biles speaks volumes about her character and determination and I for one am very glad tax-payer money (the inefficiency of it and the corruption that comes with it is not her fault) is being used to support her dreams. Whatever happens today, this evening in the finals event, she is a winner, both in her sport and in life. I don’t know about you but I find that astonishing and inspiring.

Yes lets stop the olympics . And before that lets get rid of the utterly useless national award for best critic. The director of the worst film that was ever made was directed is better than someone who makes his living as a critic.

@ sameoldnewbie: You’ve just answered your question. Right at the beginning, you mention that the gym Dipa trained in was poor. It should not take a Dipa Karmakar for people to notice that gym facilities are bad. When I say we should spend more on grassroots facilities, I mean that we should raise them up to a world class level. Eh, I just think that is more holistic than spending money on a few athletes for medals. I am not saying India does that but that winning medals at the Olympics on a consistent basis is fundamentally about focused programs to get an elite set of athletes to the highest possible level. Which, for instance, involves discouraging Li Na at every step from playing tennis just because China is more interested in badminton. In that sense, Oly spending and grassroots level improvements in sports are, well not mutually exclusive but not necessarily connected either. I am absolutely fine with India sending athletes to Olympics and not winning medals. In THAT context, I don’t think Oly glory is worth sustaining an expensive budget when, sorry, we do have more pressing priorities. But I am much more positive about spending money on sports facilities for all because that potentially benefits all of us. If we build a sporting culture, the medals will come…or perhaps not but a country with a sporting culture would also not disparage athletes in the way Mrs.Shobha De did. Idiots don’t realise, for instance, how tough it is for India’s hockey players to compete with a country like Netherlands which have a phenomenal grassroots hockey program where we have so few astroturf fields in the first place. A school near where I live is very sports centric and has its own hockey team….but they play either on the basketball court or the football field.